The richest 1% of people pollute more than the 5 billion poorest. That means while people like us are doing our best to recycle and drive less, billionaires and millionaires are jetting about the place without a care in the world. It’s just come out that the super rich ‘polluter-elite’ are using up way more than their fair share of our resources, right before Prime Minister Rishi Sunak heads to a meeting with world leaders to discuss climate solutions next week. Rishi Sunak could use this opportunity to show leadership and crack down on excessive flyers. While this is all over the news, a huge petition calling for a tax on the top fliers in the UK - not normal people going on a family holiday - could help get this on the political agenda and stop rich people from plundering the planet without caring about the rest of us.
    2,710 of 3,000 Signatures
    Why do we use fireworks? For celebration, for art? The decibel level of fireworks wreaks havoc, distress and trauma amongst animals and wildlife as well as many sectors of our communities. The noise level is pointless. It's destructive, it's harmful, it's unnecessary. Fireworks can be manufactured without the BANG! They can be made to produce beautiful light shows without danger or distress to anything or anyone. We have a responsibility to our planet and all who inhabit it. The devastation and trauma caused by fireworks is horrendous. This is totally unnecessary. The distress caused to our beloved pets and wildlife is inhumane.
    84 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Emma Ridgway
  • No Housing Development on Prescot Road Playing Fields
    This land is extremely important in terms of making up part of the sporting pitch provision and the green space of Widnes. We believe that it must remain so. This land is designated as sporting/recreational Green Space in Halton Borough Council's Local Plan, as such any permission to build a housing estate on it should be refused. We have lost many of our green areas to housing development due to government planning laws. Housing development of this land would have a hugely detrimental impact on people living in Highfield Ward and Hough Green Ward. We urge Miller Homes to think again and stop their proposal to submit a planning application to put houses on this green space. If they will not, we urge Halton Borough Council to do everything in their power to stop any part of this designated sporting/recreational/green space land being turned into a housing development. Hough Green Ward Councillors Cllr Sandra Baker Cllr Kevan Wainwright Cllr Phil Harris Highfield Ward Councillors Cllr Andrea Wall Cllr Paul Nolan Cllr Bob Gilligan
    264 of 300 Signatures
    Created by Andrea Wall Picture
  • SAY NO TO timber plantation killing prime farmland - plant for timber in marginal land instead
    High quality South West farmland, the renowned historic landscape and distinctly beautiful countryside of this area are at risk of irrevocable damage from planting the wrong trees, in the wrong place. The prospect sets a dangerous precedent for farmland across England being taken over for timber, or other greenwashing projects, approved through the back door, when it should be conserved for imperative food production to feed the nation. Plant for commercial timber in marginal land, and do not blight this rare and spectacular, expansive landscape. An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) should be conducted, at a bare minimum, in accordance with EIA regulations. Under the regulations this land, known as Bonham Plain, is a “sensitive area” (project of over 50 ha or where any part is in an AONB) Afforestation in a "sensitive area" is deemed to have significant impact on the environment, warranting an Environmental Impact Assessment to ensure a full understanding of the ramifications of planting here. It is duplicitous of the Forestry Commission to create regulations, designed to ensure their slogan "Right Tree, Right Place, Right Reason" , and then ignore them in their approval process. They have further violated the regulations by not providing any coherent reasoning for no EIA. It is useful to note the failure of process that led to the Forestry Commission's errors in approving the forestry project for Wallshield, Northumbria, which they claimed to have learnt from: https://www.channel4.com/news/forestry-commission-admits-it-was-wrong-to-allow-trees-to-be-planted-on-peat-bogs The very same failure of process has led to the approval of Bonham Plain Protect this top quality arable land to produce our food - plant for timber in marginal quality land
    517 of 600 Signatures
    Created by Bridget Wayman
  • 3 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Lawrence Watt
    Brockenhurst is a tourist hub and also host to a large student population during the day. Currently there is nowhere to recycle rubbish in the centre of the village. Recycling helps protect our environment which is currently under threat. Harmful chemicals and greenhouse gasses are released from rubbish in landfill sites. Recycling helps to reduce the pollution caused by waste. Recycling reduces the need for raw materials so that the rainforests and other raw materials can be preserved.
    3 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Camilla Pearse
  • Grandison Close Pathway
    We suffer with terrible flooding, slip and trip hazards. it becomes impossible to pass in the winter months for the elderly, disabled, wheelchairs and pushchairs. its a muddy wet slippery mess and we would like this situation resolved as soon as possible please. The walkway is the main thoroughfare for all walkers wanting to enjoy the green spaces and beyond, its a very popular area for children, dog walkers and cyclists, as well as the residents that live here. It would benefit so many people who use and frequent the area concerned.
    27 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Jane Willcox
  • Remove Cotham School’s illegal fence at Stoke Lodge Village Green
    After a long legal fight, Stoke Lodge Playing Fields were registered as a Town or Village Green (TVG) on 22 August 2023. By law, it is a public nuisance and a criminal offence to enclose, encroach on or interrupt the use and enjoyment of a TVG. However, Cotham School is refusing to remove the fence and is even claiming that it is not on TVG land! A quick look at the registered map and Google maps shows what a blatant lie this is. It is irrelevant that 5 pedestrian gates in a 1.5km fence are now open; the whole fence interrupts use and enjoyment of the land which is now a legal right for Bristol citizens. It is irrelevant that the school claims it intends to challenge registration - the law says this fence is illegal NOW. Cotham School has found alternative facilities for PE and has announced that it intends to cease maintaining the land. The fence serves no purpose and its removal is clearly in the public interest of the people of Bristol. Thousands of Bristol Citizens have a right to access and uninterrupted use of this Village Green. There are over 1,400 meters of fencing that enclose and sit on our village green - over a mile of illegal fencing. Across the UK, Councils protect thousands of Village Greens. If Bristol City Council don't do the same on their own land - why not ?
    2,911 of 3,000 Signatures
    Created by We Love Stoke Lodge Picture
  • 2 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Robin Priestley Picture
  • Restore Rubbish Bins in Exeter
    Recently Exeter City Council have taken the baffling decision to remove rubbish bins from multiple areas of the city, stating they're "underused and in the wrong location" as a reason for this (from the council's own website, which tries to put a positive spin on it yet admits it will make it harder for the public to dispose of rubbish: https://news.exeter.gov.uk/targeting-resources-on-cleansing-will-help-exeter-stay-looking-great/ ). This is manifestly untrue as the bins they have removed (e.g. Nadder Park Road; Dunsford Gardens; near the prison; near the university; by the Cathedral Green) were all well-used. No doubt they plan to remove many more well-utilised bins. The real reason is likely to be the cost of emptying them, but providing bins and keeping the streets clean is one of the council's responsibilities. I have heard multiple people voice frustration at the difficulty of finding a bin, especially for dog poo. While a majority of people will take their rubbish home (or maybe not, in the case of bags of dog waste?!), a lack of bins will inevitably lead to more littering. As well as the inconvenience to the public of a lack of bins, and the unsightly prospect of litter blowing everywhere, this will surely end up costing the council more to clean up than they would have spent on just providing bins. It's highly unrealistic and unfair to assume everyone will simply take their rubbish home with them if they can't find a bin. Without public bins there will be litter everywhere, just like how the incidences of fly-tipping significantly increased when Devon County Council made it more expensive to take things to the recycling centres. Bring back the bins! If enough people sign this perhaps the council will listen; we can protect the environment and stop Exeter and its green spaces becoming an ugly city full of litter.
    687 of 800 Signatures
    Created by C Smith
  • Ask the Secretary of State (DLUHC) to intervene in the PfE Greater Manchester spatial framework.
    Places for Everyone is Greater Manchester’s Joint Development Plan for housing, the economy and the environment (previously known as the GMSF). For the reasons set out below, we believe that it needlessly proposes Green Belt and Protected Open Land for development, which will cause harm to the climate, the environment and people’s well-being, without providing sufficient affordable homes, sustainable transport, health care facilities or schools. It should be carefully assessed by the Secretary of State on behalf of the citizens of Greater Manchester. The plan covers nine of the ten Local Authority areas in the Greater Manchester conurbation and proposes to build over 178,000 homes, of which over 28,000 will be in unsustainable locations in the Green Belt or on Protected Open Land, along with over 3 million square metres allocated for warehousing and industry. Save Greater Manchester’s Green Belt and its partner groups have grave concerns about the impact on the countryside, the environment and valued community green space. Our chief concerns are: 1. OUTDATED THINKING – National policy is being updated, and we believe that Greater Manchester would be best placed to meet the challenges ahead by having a plan based on the most up-to-date guidance. This planning process commenced in 2014 and has since been overtaken by various significant national and local events. The citizens of Greater Manchester deserve a forward-looking plan which meets THEIR needs. 2. GREEN BELT – The proposed premature and unnecessary release of 2,388 hectares of Green Belt (equivalent to 2,985 football pitches) is not consistent with the Government’s stated aspirations to channel growth towards major cities in order to protect green space. The plan’s own evidence base shows that by adopting a high-density strategy directed at the city and town centres and along sustainable public transport routes, approximately 214,000 homes could be built over the plan period without needing to release any Green Belt. The recent announcement about scrapping the Manchester leg of HS2 removes PfE's premise of aggressive exponential growth. The Plan’s spatial strategy should be changed to deliver the Public Transport Max spatial option, which would be affordable, achievable and sustainable! 3. ECOLOGY – Given that the allocated Green Belt will be released on the day that the plan is approved, there is a lack of evidence about the ecological and biodiversity impact of the plan and no clarity about why such environmentally rich sites have been selected rather than prioritising the regeneration of brownfield sites. 4. SCHOOL PLACES/HEALTH SERVICES – Despite the plan proposing sufficient new housing to create the equivalent of two new boroughs in GM, there is no land set aside for a new hospital to support the consequential 450,000 additional citizens, no evidence that sufficient school places will be provided (an issue that is already a red risk for some GM districts), nor that there will be sufficient sites for GPs and dentists. 5. NET ZERO – We believe an alternative strategy that integrates development with sustainable public transport would better support the country’s commitment to net zero. As the carbon assessments for the Cambridge Local Plan show, the right kind of spatial development will have a substantial impact on reducing emissions without the costly overhead that climate mitigation measures usually carry. 6. CLEAN AIR ZONE / ULEZ – Integrating development and public transport would also organically reduce dependency on private transport and would have a positive impact on reducing air pollution, which should avert the need to impose punitive and unfair charges on car users through the CAZ. 7. AFFORDABLE HOMES – The plan originally committed to delivering 50,000 affordable homes over the plan period, but the Greater Manchester Combined Authority reneged on this policy commitment during the Examination in Public. We believe this is disingenuous and makes a mockery of the name of the plan, since the people of Greater Manchester have been conned into believing that Green Belt is being sacrificed to build affordable homes. 8. TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING – There is no evidence that funding is available to deliver the extremely long list of “Necessary” transport infrastructure requirements of the 34 unsustainable Green Belt locations, as set out in the Places for Everyone Plan.
    5,671 of 6,000 Signatures
    Created by Save Greater Manchester's Green Belt Group
  • Protect Nature Now - A Community Wildlife Area for Holcombe
    We all know that we are facing a Nature and Climate emergency, and with the news this week that the UK is one of the most nature-deprived countries in the world (1), it is even more urgent that we make and protect space for wildlife in our local communities. Let’s campaign with Action on Climate in Teignbridge (ACT) to create a space for nature here in Holcombe. It is envisioned that a Community Wildlife Area, could be created on Hall Lane, in Holcombe, near Dawlish, and might include the following: • An unsurfaced path looping around the site, giving the public access whilst limiting disturbance to wildlife. • Benches. • An earth bund to remark the top of the site. • A community wildflower garden with agroforestry trees - including nuts and fruit • Information boards about local wildlife and other signage to promote education and appropriate access. • Encouraging and developing a mosaic of habitats including hedges, wet woodland, seasonal flood zone. • Installation of reptile hibernaculum, bird and bat boxes to encourage colonisation. • Managing the Streamside habitat to promote well balanced and diverse populations of flora and fauna; possibly with the inclusion of a lined pond. • Ensure that this trail meets the needs of less mobile people. • Promote wellbeing - with quiet areas, and sensory areas. The area, owned by Devon County Council Estates, has not been used for farming and has been unused scrub-land for some considerable time. The area is prone to freshwater flooding and is a rare wet woodland area - which we would like to enhance, adding a wildflower meadow, a community education area, storage for maintenance tools/kettle, and an agroforestry area - offering nuts and fruit for the community. There are lots of initiatives now currently seeking to encourage the planting of wildflowers to help combat climate change, help wildlife and pollinators and to transform our own wellbeing. We feel this area could easily become, with a little work, a wildlife area the local community could really be proud about. References: 1) https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2023/september/one-in-six-species-at-risk-of-going-extinct-in-great-britain.html https://www.wwf.org.uk/future-of-uk-nature https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66923930
    66 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Cllr Alison Foden